Posted on 07/26/2009 6:30:14 PM PDT by AdamBomb
[snip] "Now, how can the DOH in Hawaii say she personally saw and handled Obama’s original birth certificate IF IT WAS DESTROYED IN 2001?! Why in the hell do you destroy original birth certificates anyways? This suggests corruption at the highest levels of our Federal and State governments. It means that Hawaii flat-out LIED about the original birth certificate being in Hawaii. Wonder who gave the order? Even if birth certificates are computerized, the originals still normally exist in archives.[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at notanotherconspiracy.com ...
You said:
“All the candidates have sworn an oath that they comply with those requirements of the Constitution, and there’s nothing else needed for qualifications...”
Where do you get this from?
Is it in the Constitution? Or do you have a Court ruling claiming such?
Why do you think that no one is allowed to question the eligibility of a candidate?
No it is not wht the people have allowed all of the time. Tell me where the precedent for this aloowance is?
The only other candidate who may have had a foreign citizen parent was challenged as well.
You see, she is a liar, a twister of facts. She on the one hand baits you with this 'he's sworn he agrees witht he Constitution' and purposely ignores the blatant contradiction of Barry agreeing with what McCain had to prove to suit the democrat controlled Seante committee.
The poster is a deceiver, and when one of her talking points is refuted, she moves on to another, always looking for someone to blow up.
No candidate has ever been legally required to produce a birth certificate and they have always signed sworn statements as to their Constitutional eligibility... nothing has changed...
If you want it to change, then you’re going to have to have the states put forth legislation and pass it which requires a candidate to produce his birth certificate or else he cannot be placed on the state ballot.
Until you do that, you’re not going to be able to legally require any candidate to produce his birth certificate.
Thanks for the heads up. I notice the way she skirts around the issue trying to make it seem as if the People have no rights.
The Constitution requires that a candidate...
*be* 35 or older
*be* a natural born citizen
*be* a resident for 14 years or more...
The candidates have signed sworn statements saying that they *are*...
That’s the requirements of the Constitution — to *be* what it says...
If you want a birth certificate, and since there is no legal requirement for a candidate to produce one, then you’re going to have to get a state law passed which requires the candidate to produce a birth certificate or else they will not be placed on the ballot...
Yea right. You are an idiot if you believe that the People have no right to demand that the law already in place (the U.S. Constitution)be upheld.
You go along and start campaigns to make new laws that you think will trump the law that already exists (the U.S. Constitution).
See the link at post #94, this thread.
I agree. All it will take is one state but we need as many states as possible to pass it. Please contract your state house rep and suggest they get the ball rolling.
Oklahoma has a bill in the Senate. Not sure what ever happened to it.
John
The candidates agree and they swear that the law of the Constitution is being upheld in regards to their qualifications...
They don’t disagree with you...
It didn’t pass in Oklahoma and this session is over. But there is next session...
And yes, I would like to see at least four or five or so... then it gets interesting... :-)
Good pickup. I am tired of this lefty. The whole argument that she gives is that the Constitution isn’t good enough and that we need to make news laws if we want to enforce the Constitution. PATHETIC!
Why did it not pass?
Wow! Obama dosen’t agree with me?
Bt neither do you?
Pathetic! Get lost lefty.
I don’t know really, but I do know that it will be back again... :-)
Once again you are choosing that which you will address.
Go back to my original post to you (#67) you will see that I was not questioning the birth certificate issue, as I stated I believe he is constitutionally eligible.
My question to you was in regard to the rest of his secrecy and all I see you posting is BBS (bureaucratic bull shiite) about what he has to or doesn’t have to produce.
Why do you insist on defending him? Regardless of your claims about working to enact laws (like we need any more of those) you are still defending him by faulting those who are seeking to force him to reveal information that everyone else in his position has been hounded by the press to do so, and has done so.
Forget the damned birth certificate, what about his school and health records? Even Bill Clinton, one of the most secretive of secretive released them.
Why is it that you don’t think 0bam0 shouldn’t do what all of his predecessors did? Why do you insist on giving him a pass in the court of public opinion that all others in such position have generally adhered?
Why?
No, Obama and all the candidates agree with you in abiding by the qualifications for office per the Constitution. There is absolutely no disagreements on that basis with any of the candidates...
I never said the Constitution was not good enough. I said that all the candidates agree that those requirements for office, the qualifications for office — must be upheld and they each affirm and swear that they uphold them.
There is no disagreement on upholding the Constitution on the basis of these requirements with any of the candidates...
The Feds never outlined how to enforce it implying that it was left up to the states.
States should only allow candidates on the ballot that are eligible to serve. They have never set up any formal procedures which has led to inconsistencies in how various states have handled this in the past.
The answer lies in getting the States to set up laws to do that.
John
Sorry you are wrong there. Obama simply refuses to provide the information needed to allow a Court to rule on this issue.
You continually ignore that and pretend that his sworn statement is all that is needed and that no one has a right to ask for more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.